neumann_alfred

?

"have had the luxury of having great parents who never bothered playing such mind games with you"

And I run into PLENTY of adults who just tried to use their privilege, or lies, for shortcut solutions. I know how they fared. So what exactly don't I have experience with, other than doing it to someone else?

"I suggest you read Steve Yegge's"

I suggest you actually address the content of my posts.

No, it means I got a LOT of replies goin on and on about strawmen. I consider those replies to my posts, imagine that.

please stop throwing hissy fits because people called you out on your lack of credibility.

Well, I appreciate the irony and the projection. Mocking non-sequitur arguments repeating what they missed isn't throwing a hissy fit just because I'm not going out of my way to read the whole thread over and over, and your argument boils down to "believing in Santa doesn't hurt anyone either". Well, that still makes it an undesirable, unnecessary, mediocre thing at best. And I don't buy the whole "kids at 4 are super egotistical" either, some are rather protective of their baby sibling for example, so they clearly know what being disturbed is. Actually, I remember one thing my father told my when I was a kid, that you can't lie to babies, they always notice... I took that literally, and told my baby brother I'd go to the toilet, thinking "I will go to the kitchen instead". When I left the room and he failed to cry, I was disappointed, I was already planning on using him as lie detector. You see, the fact that you shrug off the myth of Santa, the uttering of which would have been like crapping on the carpet for my family, just tells me we experienced and live in different worlds. And I couldn't care less about the additional credibility which the "parent" flag would give me, it's just not relevant; if I have kids they might turn out to be completely different persons who I was. But instead of speculating about a kid who is not me, even if it's "mine", I actually do remember. As you say so ironically, "Feel free to disagree", feel free to claim I remember wrong or whatever; but don't throw hissy fits just because your kids don't notice that shit.

Yeah, it's almost as if it's a relationship between two humans, instead of a one-way input pipe.

Do you have children?

What makes you ask? That I respect kids more than quite a bunch of folks who are actually raising some? Or is that just an attempt to dismiss what I said without addressing it? That shit is getting real old.

The fact that your intuition is deceiving you is expert knowledge.

Nah, it's gotta have slightly more substance than that; no matter how often you repeat it. Just literally telling me to shut up won't cut it either.

Riddle me this, how is it not possible to tell your kid you want them to be not yell so loud when playing computer games impossible, and in what situation is it preferably to deceive them? If they actually respect their toys more than their parents, that's clearly a FUBAR situation.

You might say you don't know, because you are not familiar with the details. Well then, what of the stuff you do have experience with would lead you to say "hands off, it's 'their' children"? I mean, by this logic you also give carte blanche to any and all abuse, too: after all, nobody should judge what people do with 'their' children. I say bollocks to that, and am still waiting for a single argument that actually applies to this situation, instead of just hiding behind generalities, strawmen and logical fallacies.

Look, I know you have your own opinion and all, but I don't think you're really even qualified to discuss this if you haven't done any programming before.

Yeah, but if the programmer actually does have the experience, he CAN prove it, albeit in language the layman may not understand or follow. I don't see this happening here in this particular case. And therefore...

The layman feels challenged. "Okay, if you're the big expert here, why don't you just share some of this so-called expertise with the rest of us?"

The amateur is perplexed. "...that's what I'm doing."

This discussion will never arrive at a productive result.

Where are you guys doing that, sharing the expert knowledge? You skip INSTANTLY to "only parents would understand", AND you ignore the facts that some parents disagree, which is rendering your entire argument zilch -- that isn't hard to get, I already mentioned that and am now repeating; will you repeat with an even bigger wall of text every time I point out that flaw? Are you treating me like a kid, perhaps? No need to explain, just keep using big words and bloat it up? Pah.

He will talk with other children but not yell. [..] Lots of children also behave like my son.

Does he also not ever squee real loud for sheer excitement? You know, humans only have a short window where they can even experience the world that intensely. Sometimes it's good to let them.

I also think that if you make clear the boundaries for children, they will honor them.

Yes, but I think it's important to have good reasons (there's plenty for "don't yell at people", not so many for "do not ever, under any circumstances, exceed this loudness threshold while playing"), and to be honest about them; like you are, and like the OP decidedly isn't. Even just "you cannot understand that yet", if it's actually true and spoken in a bond of trust, can be enough. But "the magic pixie dust in the computer has spoken because I can't be arsed to tell you to shut up while I leave you alone with the computer?" Nah.

If you set that alarm, you know why and what for you are conditioning yourself, and that is even true if you know how and why someone else set it; but when it's just a faceless event that you learn to adapt to, possibly while even having a narrative about it that has nothing to do with reality, that's not just slightly different or worse, for me that's worlds apart.

I would ask what did they mean by "working"? If the kid doesn't understand addition anyway, and asks what is 2+2, why not tell them 4? What would be the rationale to say it's 5, what is "working" here? It answered the question, but so would the correct answer.

Then you might realize that, yes, not knowing anything about parenting actually does mean you have no basis to evaluate parenting decisions.

If that parenting knowledge gives people expert insight, why don't they share it? Why hide behind "only parents would understand" (even ignoring that some parents disagree with them)? Why not refute the so obviously wrong armchair amateur advice with the correct facts? I see lots of talk, where is the money?

not knowing anything about parenting actually does mean you have no basis to evaluate parenting decisions.

It's cute, but sadly I saw what you did there: What or who, other than asexually reproducing life forms, or maybe those that lay eggs, does not know anything about parenting?

And frankly, most of the criticism has nothing to do with parenting but with intellectual honesty and how much you yourself understand about the world. If you teach your kid 2+2=5, I will be sure that is wrong, and "but you don't have kids" is a hilarious rebuttal.

Or, have had the luxury of having great parents who never bothered playing such mind games with you. Of course, since such gifted parents are rare, it's easy to simply dismiss such a high standard. But once you go non-bullshit, it's just hard to go back.

The topic is about the question how to blank the screen when a certain loudness threshold is reached. Which means "is even anyone else in the house" or other such factors do not enter into it. Which in turn means this isn't teaching politeness, this is like teaching a dog; no disrespect to dogs intended, but I mean that they usually just learn what to do, not why (which is fine in the case of a dog, unacceptable for a kid).

Maybe it just seems like being dramatic to you because I'm actually paying attention to the finer details here, and you don't. I complain about this specific case, and you defend it because there's sometimes a reason to tell a kid to not yell etc... which is funny, but not quite the rebuttal you imagine it to be.

Telling a kid to quiet down while playing a PC game is simply to teach them to respect the presence of others around them.

I completely agree; what in anything I wrote makes you think I don't? And what about the topic makes you think what is being done here?

Though I would add that I wouldn't want to be the person who doesn't sometimes also get joy out of the loud expression of joy from others. Depends on what you're doing etc.,.. so respect also means letting the kids holler sometimes. Respect doesn't just go one way, and if you haven't made children to become happy humans, what have you made them for?

But don't get sidetracked, remember: The parent in question does NOT tell their kids "I want you to be more quiet, so I made this script", they outright lie (and proudly report that it's working, too), and even seek to automate it just to put a hard cap on the loudness levels of their kids.

And that's okay because it's effective, gets the desired result, case closed...? Well pah, I disagree, just like I also frown upon telling kids they should be nice so Santa gives them presents; not because I am against being nice, but because I'm against the layer of indirection and dishonesty.

This is the second time I responded to a strawman, and I find that telling in and of itself. I have nothing against something the parent in question isn't even doing, I have something against what they actually are doing. Is that so hard to understand? You don't turn kids into "good adults" by not taking them seriously and telling them the computer is annoyed by loud noise... What. The. Fuck. That this topic is not _full_ of ridicule, just like the comments on the linked site, is just sad.

Not computer games they can't. And not in all seasons/kinds of weather, either.

I'm fairly certain that every mother ever has told her children to stop yelling in the house at least once.

And I'm fairly certain every parent (mother? what?) also sometimes allowed it. You know, politeness is kind of about a sentient counterpart, rather a fixed sound threshold in a panopticon.

From the single bit of data I have, your idea of repression seems to be anything less than complete anarchy

How so? If I think it's repressing if a child is under no circumstance allowed to yell out in joy or fright while playing? What does this have to do with anarchy? That's not anarchy, that's life.